The productive assessment of two tilapia nilotica (Oreochromis niloticus) commercial strains in Sinaloa Mexico

• Espinosa-Chaurand, Daniel ^[1] ; Aparicio-Simón, Benjamín ^[1] ; Cortés-Sánchez, Alejandro De Jesús ^[1] ; Garza-Torres, Rodolfo ^[1] ; García-Morales, Ricardo ^[1] ; Maeda-Martínez, Alfonso N. ^[1]
  1. [1] Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas

     Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas

     Madrid, España

     
• Localización: Latin American Journal of Aquatic Research, ISSN-e 0718-560X, ISSN 0716-1069, Vol. 47, Nº. 3, 2019, págs. 440-448
• Idioma: inglés
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo
• Resumen

  • This study compared survival, growth, feed conversion rate (FCR) and harvested biomass of two commercial strains of tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) cultivated in Mexico: Spring Genetic-Benchmark Holding® originated from the Genetically Improved Farmed Tilapia GIFT (Genebank: GIFT GU477624.1) and strain B from different line-breeding (Genebank: Philippines GU477626.1, Guangdong GU477627.1, and America GU477628.1). The study was performed in six geomembrane ponds (2,520 m3; 30×40×1.5 m) with supplementary aeration, in Los Pozos farm, El Rosario, Sinaloa, Mexico. In July 2016, 26,762 ± 170 fries of each strain (2.9 ± 0.1 g and 5.4 ± 0.2 cm) were cultivated in the nursery under similar conditions in triplicate at 11 ind m-3 for 34 days; then, they were transferred to the grow-out ponds and fed with 30% crude protein balanced feed (Purina®) at a rate of 12% live weight day-1 in three rations (07:00, 12:00 and 17:00 h) for 123 days. The results showed that Spring had a lower variation coefficient (VC) and higher survival, growth rate in weight, initial and final size, and harvested biomass. Survival was 30.7% greater in Spring and doubled harvested biomass (Spring 10 ± 0.8 t ha-1 vs. B strain 5 ± 4.7 t ha-1). Sixty percent of the Spring population reached a commercial weight of 500 g in day 123th of cultivation compared with 20% of B population in the same period. Except for FCR, VC was lower in the Spring strain. Differences in productive parameters were probably due to the genetic selection programs at which both strains were subjected.